Housing in Blackburn between the Wars

A.C. Fisher

1995 marked the 75th anniversary of the opening in Blackburn of the Borough's first municipal housing. During the 1920s, investors and speculators were unwilling to invest in working class housing. In order to cope with a national shortage of affordable accommodation, Lloyd George's government involved County and Borough councils in assessing local need, and in erecting and managing the required housing. Blackburn had only a limited housing problem, but the challenge was accepted with speed and enthusiasm. Councils remained throughout the inter-war period the principal agent for implementation of government housing strategies, and this article described how Blackburn Borough Council accepted, interpreted and applied those policies. A complete survey of Blackburn housing over two decades is however neither required nor appropriate. Instead, the following survey focuses on two particular housing schemes - only yards apart- and demonstrates through this contrast how the aims and effects of housing strategy changed over time.

Blackburn's Housing in 1919

Evidence (such as census returns) shows that at the end of the Great War, the housing shortage in the Borough of Blackburn were not as bad as that of most other Lancashire towns, and indeed was the least unsatisfactory of any town in the cotton district. Blackburn's Housing Chairman recalled in 1920 that:

"It was instructive to recall that on the 1911 census, with the exception of Blackpool, Southport and Wallasey, Blackburn had the lowest figures in overcrowding of any town in Lancashire, Cheshire and Yorkshire. One important town had a population of private families living more than two to a room of 17%, whereas Blackburn had only 4.4% and Blackpool 4.2%". (1)

The 1921 census revealed that this figure had improved in Blackburn's case to under 3.9%, compared with 9% for Bolton and now 5% for Blackpool, although approaching 5000 families still lived in conditions worse than this official benchmark. Not that this figure should be seen to imply good sanitary conditions or a relatively high quality of housing. Rather, working class housing stock in the area was relatively young in age, while outward migration had reduced the incidence of overcrowding. In 1927 Neville Chamberlain, Minister of Health, visited the town's slums and is reported to have asked: "is this all you have got to show me? It is not very bad. It is nothing like Manchester or Birmingham.." (2)

Blackburn had steadily expanded her housing between 1865 and 1901. Areas such as Audley Range and Mill Hill were developed to absorb an increasing population. Mill owners and speculators built for rent, and housing stock rose from 13,000 units in 1865 to 19,000 in 1879, and to over 29,000 in 1921. The borough had already tackled (under the Cross Acts) some of the worst inner-city slum areas such as in the Salford Area Clearance (late 1880s) and the Blakey Moor site, upon which King George's Hall was built. Thus, by the time of Dr. Addison's Housing Act in 1919, much of the borough's housing was under 50 years of age. Most of the Victorian housing was laid out in grid-pattern streets, surrounding mills and workshops. It was classic terraced two up, two down housing with living room, scullery, two bedrooms and a rear yard leading to the privy and rear access. Local Improvement Acts regulated this development: in 1882 limits on housing densities were imposed, and controls on privies tightened. The town was very progressive in this area compared with other districts such as Preston. Housing developments were laid out with the aim of fitting the maximum permitted number of houses into a given area. Throughout the working class wards population densities were excessive:

Dwellings per acre by Ward

St. Matthew's 21.8

St. Paul's 19.9

St. John's 18.1

Trinity 14.6

Borough average 4.2 (3)

Most of these families (as was true for three fifths of the population generally) lived in four roomed houses. Half of the remaining homes had a fifth room tacked on to the rear of the house. Unlike other towns there were no back-to-back houses (the construction of which had banned since 1854) and only one block of flats or tenements. Thus, most families enjoyed a private dwelling.

The Housing Act piloted by Addison in 1919 required, as a preliminary step, local authorities to make a survey of working-class housing needs within their districts; and to submit a plan to build the necessary homes. The concept of government using local authorities to effect its housing policies was not new. The Cross Acts of 1875-1878 had empowered councils to clear slums and build replacements, although few had taken the latter course. In 1890 authorities were required to identify and improve or demolish individual unfit houses or whole areas. Despite urgings from (among others) Blackburn Trade Council, the council had not exercised these powers. But in 1918 the Council responded to an enquiry from the Local Government Board stating that 'the council expressed its willingness to provide any necessary houses for the working classes for their district, so far as not otherwise provided, at an early date...” (4)

The special sub-committee charged with responding to the Act's requirements drew up a plan to build almost six hundred houses at three locations - Green Lane, Intack and Brownhill. (5)

Dr. Addison responded personally, advising the Mayor to commence 'at the very earliest moment' pointing out that 'building operations will be of great benefit in absorbing demobilised labour'. (6)

By the time that letter was received, advertisements for tenders for the first houses had already been placed. Thus it was that Blackburn, with a relatively limited need in the way of working-class accommodation, was one of the first to commence building.

The Town's First Council Houses

Green Lane Housing Estate

The Green Lane Housing site was one of the three proposed by the Borough Council in 1919. The site of 13.4 acres was a former cricket ground to the extreme west of the town, off Livesey Branch Road. Negotiation with the site owners - the Mercer family- failed, and the Council sought a compulsory purchase order. Reports of the ensuing arbitration hearing provide interesting information on the local housing situation: the District Valuer believed there was no overcrowding in Blackburn, and that he "did not think we have any slum districts, speaking in the strict sense of the term".

"Can you account for these housing schemes unless there is some necessity for them?... There is the improvement in the condition of the working classes to consider. (They) are not content with the same surroundings as in the past... They want better houses?... A proportion of them do; not all". (7)

He expressed a view that if the Corporation failed to build houses, the private sector were unlikely to do so. The Council had offered £2000 for the site, the owners sought £3350: the arbitration award was £2280 - £170 per acre or £16 15s 3d per house.

Plans were laid for 136 houses on the site. Most would have three bedrooms (a few four), and all had a bathroom upstairs, living room and scullery, and a separate indoor W.C. Three quarters would also have a front parlour which gave some privacy in larger families. In these houses no chimney would be built into the scullery - instead gas ovens and gas wash-boilers would be fitted. (8)

The estate was laid out as semi-detached houses, or blocks of four (with a central passageway serving the inner pair) thus avoiding the need for a rear access road. The days of terraced housing were over. The first houses to be completed were opened ceremonially by Alderman Fielding, Chairman of the Housing Committee, on 10th November 1920. He listed the benefits: -

"The houses did not face each other at a distance of less than seventy feet, and there were no back projections, which in the past had cut off sunlight, the greatest germ destroyer and vitalising power in the world. It has been said that the rooms were not large enough to swing a cat round. Those who took that view would be surprised to learn that the average floor space of the houses is 20% larger than that of the average parloured house built in Blackburn before the war." (9)

For full information on the claimed benefits, see appendix.

The tenants for these first houses were selected from among over fifty who had approached the council. Before they could move in however, the houses were opened to public inspection, one being temporarily furnished for the purpose. A local newspaper reports that:

'During the three weeks the first completed plan of homes...have been open for public inspection, over 12,000 people have visited them. On several days the number has exceeded 1000. There have been daily queues and as many as 300 people have been counted standing in a queue. Some having waited two hours. Several deputations from other towns have been officially conducted over the house and people have come from places as far away as Newcastle and Leeds'. (10)

Tenants moved in as homes were completed, but progress was slow. On one occasion councillors complained that: 'the number of bricklayers at work has not averaged more than nine... and at this rate it will take 18 years to complete (houses) which are required at once'. (11)

One contractor who had won an agreement to build 52 houses within twelve months, had not completed the project after sixteen. The council threatened to cancel the contract and complete the work themselves.

Under Addison's Assisted Housing Scheme, the council received a subsidy equal to the difference between the rents and the costs in excess of the income generated by a 1d rate. The idea of gaining an economic rent was seen as impractical, but authorities were expected to seek the 'best possible' return. In 1921, the economy generally took a severe downward turn. Tenants petitioned the council for rent reductions, and these were agreed from April 1922. Tenants now paid 12s 6d per week for a parlour house, or 10s otherwise, with rates extra. In view of the fact that the government would foot the bill for this rent reduction, permission had to be obtained. It was this vulnerability that led to the Geddes Commission suspending the scheme.

Early 1920s and the Geddes Axe

In 1919, Blackburn's Housing Committee had adopted a plan to build almost 600 houses on three sites- Green Lane, Intack and Brownhill. The first houses were built at Green Lane during 1920, and work on the purchase and layout of the other sites put in hand. A site of 13.5 acres was purchased from the Intack Estate Company, and £6,150 paid for 25.5 acres at Brownhill. The Council considered the merits of building at Intack using direct labour rather than by using a contractor. The Master Builders Federation lodged a protest at the proposal, disputing the Council's costings. The committee however argued that speed was their main concern: 'In view of ... unsatisfactory progress that is being made at the Green Lane site, we recommend that the Housing Committee have a scheme prepared for building houses by direct labour.' (12)

It was decided to build forty houses at Intack by direct labour. In the event, only half were built, the balance was affected by the government spending cuts of 1922.

The plans for the Brownhill site were slightly more complex. In 1913, to mark the visit of the King and Queen to their mill at Roe Lee, Messrs Duckworth and Eddleston had donated to the borough 16 acres of land for use as a public park - Roe Lee. In addition, plans were in hand to build an Arterial Road from Whitebirk, through Brownhill to Yew Tree - partly to provide work for the unemployed. The route passed through the intended housing site. The plan was to build housing on three sides of the new park, and on either side of the proposed main road. The plans were however required to be abruptly changed. The Geddes Committee had been appointed by the Government to consider and recommend reductions in government spending plans. Put simply, the post-war boom had fizzled out; many exporters having been made painfully aware that markets lost in wartime were largely irrecoverable.

The government had indicated that it would still be willing to consider limited proposals for further house building. The Council therefore submitted a plan to build by direct labour 20 further houses, without parlours, at Intack. The Ministry rejected the project, suggesting instead that 'fresh plans of smaller houses based on the Ministry type plan' should be substituted. The Borough's Housing Committee responded they 'are not prepared to proceed with the erection of houses of an inferior type to those previously approved by the Ministry and erected by the Corporation'. (13)

However, the Committee later backed down and sought tenders for 'non-parlour houses with amended specifications'. The Green Lane site, and forty houses at Intack, were the only ones to be built in Blackburn under Addison's 1919 Housing Act.

The 1923 and 1924 Housing Acts

With the onset of depression, Lloyd George had backed away from his propagandist "land fit for heroes" statement and became exiled into the political wilderness. Bonar Law moved into Downing Street, and Neville Chamberlain became Minister of Health, charged with the problem of restarting house building. Chamberlain was unable to overlook the knowledge, experience and willingness of Local Authorities to create local housing, although his instincts were that the private sector was better able to provide economic and affordable housing. Thus, the centrepiece of the 1923 Housing Act was a scheme whereby Councils would provide subsidies to private builders, willing to build small homes for the working classes.

Blackburn Council determined that a grant of £100 per house should encourage about fifty units intended for sale to be started over the first three months of the scheme, and 'that the selling and letting value of the houses proposed to be built is insufficient to enable the houses to be provided without assistance, and that (£100) is the minimum required to induce the builders to provide the houses'. (14)

The houses were carefully defined: a maximum floor area of 950 square feet with a fixed bath and built at a maximum density to the acre. In 1925 an additional though controversial requirement was added: the final selling price of the house must not exceed £600. Builders submitted their plans which, on approval would receive a grant certificate. On completion of the property, the house was inspected and the grant paid. A time limit was imposed for the construction. The first payment was made in July 1924 to a local builder, Mr. Harper Southworth, for three bungalows in Preston Old Road. His was one of several building firms which over the next few years concentrated on small housing in areas such as Buncer Lane, Lammack, Pleckgate, and later on the new Arterial Road. The council spent £35,000 on subsidies up to the end of 1926. The following month the Housing Committee decided to cut the grant by a quarter to £75 per house, at the same time reducing the maximum selling price to £550. Almost a hundred further certificates were issued over the ensuing six months or so, before the council decided that grant-aid was no longer necessary to encourage private building in Blackburn and dropped the schemes.

The 1923 act still required the authorities to be builder of the last resort, and a rent subsidy was introduced at £6 per house for twenty years. Thus, the open commitment of 1919 was replaced by a limited and determinable subsidy. The council renewed its plans for Intack, where a small number of flats were included for the first time; the bulk of the houses had no parlour and only two bedrooms. Nationally, this subsidy was to prove insufficient to bring rents down to an affordable level.

Sixty-nine houses and 28 flats were built at Intack under the 1923 act, before the rent subsidy was increased in 1924 to £9 per annum over 40 years. Most of Blackburn's inter-war municipal housing was finally built under the 1924 provisions. This act, Wheatley's Housing Act, reduced the cost, quality and size of municipal housing to a minimal level, knowing that even these could only be let at a subsidised rent. The idealist 'garden-suburb' approach to planning - the 'Tudor Walters' standard- had largely vanished.

Municipal housing estates of the 1920s were rarely planned with a view to providing local services. Only on the Whitebirk development, for example, were neighbourhood shops provided. A scheme to provide a public house at Longshaw was rejected after opposition in the Council. The sites were often at considerable distance from the town centre, making tram or bus fares a major item of expenditure. Tenants had often been displaced from condemned housing which was none the less central, and they suffered from the loss of good neighbours and local communities. Despite subsidy, the council house rents were still frequently more expensive than those of older terraced property, and so they were often let only to the more stable and relatively prosperous working-class families.

Following the completion of the original three developments, the Borough looked beyond for additional sites. Further land was developed in the Whitebirk area, taking most of the area between Intack and Burnley Road. A further site was identified in the Hollin Street/ Hollin Bridge Street area, and land was also acquired at Teak Street (now Rosewood Avenue).

Council housing in the 1920s, then, consisted of small but attractive units on town-edge sites and thus a tram ride away from town centre amenities. Green Lane residents had either to cross the canal and railway to Cherry Tree Station or walk through Livesey Branch Road. The time, costs and inconvenience of living in such locations, added to the fact that the rents were higher than for older terraced property, dissuaded many people from seeking such housing.

There was a notable turnover of tenants, although this is true also of older privately rented property. Of the first ten households listed in the 1921 electoral roll, only three or four are listed in the 1925 street directory. There were several controls over tenants. For example, the taking in of lodgers- a common feature at this time- was outlawed, and some were threatened with eviction for this reason. The carrying out of a business from home was also not permitted, and a tenant was warned for doing hairdressing.

Analysis of Green Lane tenants by occupation shows the district to have attracted few manual or factory workers. (15)

The largest groups in 1925 are clerks and commercial travellers; there was a handful of motor engineers, draftsmen, teachers and cashiers. From the textile industry, there were several overlookers, mill furnishers and mill managers but only one drawer-in and no weavers. The directories however list household heads only, and it is likely that some wives would be engaged in mill work. Only four homes were headed by women, probably widows with families. Professionals included a pharmacist, a sanitary inspector, station master, two architects and an excise officer. Two Blackburn Rovers players - Peter Holland and Stanley Dixon- also lived on the estate.

By 1935 the pattern had changed only slightly. Four weavers now appear but so do a police sergeant and a civil engineer. It is likely that a largely upper-working to lower-middle class community was maintained throughout the period. It is notable that when the possibility of some houses being sold was raised, the council felt it necessary to assure that 'there was no reason to apprehend that the site would deteriorate'. (16)

When in 1939, the Housing Committee proposed the earmarking of a number of houses on the estate for families displaced by a slum clearance programme, 111 residents signed a petition of objection. (17)

They would be well aware of the character of such families because of their proximity to the Brothers Street site.

1930s Slum Clearance Programme

As mentioned earlier, Blackburn had taken action during the late Victorian period to clear many of its central slum districts. Consequently, the problem with regard to poor quality and overcrowded housing was far less acute by 1930 compared to many similar towns. However, MacDonald's new Labour administration had fastened upon slum clearance in 1930 (as part of a wider public works programme) in order to pursue the twin aims of unemployment relief, and of improving the conditions in which the workers lived. His Minister of Health, Arthur Greenwood, piloted another Housing Bill through Parliament. It required local councils to undertake an immediate survey into housing conditions, and to establish a plan for clearance of slums and the rehousing of those displaced. Rent rebates were introduced for the first time, to enable the poorest of these to meet the higher rents on their new homes. Central government grants were now based upon the number of people rehoused, rather than the number of households.

The Borough Housing Committee completed a report in December 1930, identifying a need for 2,425 houses over five years. This proposal was however quashed the following month by the veto of the Finance Committee: a move that was upheld by the full council despite the vigorous objections of Labour's Alderman Porter. A more modest plan for 750 houses was substituted, half of which were planned for erection in 1931/32 on the 60-acre site of Longshaw Farm. Of these 24 were to be 'of a small type to be let at low rent to persons displaced by the closing of insanitary dwellings'. (18)

Building work began at Longshaw but was shortly curtailed as a result of the 1931 budget crisis which toppled the Labour government. It was not until 1933 that the government was able to resume support for housebuilding, and that support was subject to further conditions - slum clearance was now a priority. The Ray Committee examined policy and found that government housing subsidies were largely ineffective in helping those to whom the aid was intended. Funding was therefore withdrawn for all housing provision except that designed to reduce overcrowding, or to eliminate slums.

The council launched a further study, identifying houses where improvement or reconditioning was essential; and some-where demolition was the only practical remedy. Seven small clearance areas were identified, amounting to between three and ten houses per site. In addition, 21 individual houses were singled out as beyond repair: In all some 185 people would need rehousing. The problem was tiny compared with some other towns, and it was hoped to rehouse all by the end of 1934. A larger programme, aimed at refurbishing over 2,000 homes over five years was also approved. (19)

Rehousing Slum Tenants

Tintern Creasent, Little Harwood c1950.

In order to meet its obligations under the 1930 Act, the Borough had to undertake the rehousing of 56 households. It planned 25 houses on a site previously purchased in Brothers Street 'containing the minimum floor space required by section 101 of the Blackburn Improvement Act'. (20)

The 1882 Local Act laid down a minimum 690 square feet for a two-storey house. The houses were probably intended to house some of the smaller families displaced. A number of larger units were later added, bringing the total number of houses planned to 52. The cost was estimated at over £21,000. An analysis of directory information for the areas covered by clearance areas show 'labourer' to be given as the head of household occupation in no less than 17 of the 27 clearance area homes for which data is listed (21). Four other households have female heads. It is clear that in these run-down and (presumably) cheap inner areas, the social mix differed widely from that found at Green Lane.

The government rejected the town's initial plans for the Brother Street houses. It insisted that the superficial floor area of the four bedroomed houses be reduced from 950 square feet to 880; the three-bed from 776 to 760 and the two bed from 690 to 650. The cost estimate thus fell to £19, 613 (about £377 per house or under half that paid at Green Lane in 1920). The Ministry also instructed that the four-bedroomed houses should only be used to accommodate households with seven or more members.

Having re-evaluated this scheme, the housing committee received a letter from the Blackburn & District Building Trades Employers Association, stating that it was 'not prepared to recommend members to build houses for letting to the working class (under the Act) (22). In the event a tender from a Manchester builder was accepted. Most of these houses were built in a new street, Beaumaris Avenue - off Brothers Street itself and only a few hundred yards from the earlier Green Lane development.

The Council owned and ran the local Electricity Works and established a new scheme for the Brothers Street estate. A fixed charge of 1/- per week was collected at the same time as the rent (which already included charges for rates and water). This charge included the consumption of 126 units per annum, beyond which any extra units would be charged at the special low rate of 1/2d each. The object was to assist the new tenants to avoid debt: the Borough Treasurer calculated using an established formula the rent that should be chargeable (based on cost) and means-tested rent rebates that would be available to individual tenants. If income or commitments changed, then tenants were required to notify the Town Clerk. In a controversial move, the housing committee proposed that:

'necessary plain furniture at a capital cost to the Corporation not exceeding £18 per house (should) be supplied to those tenants who will be displaced from clearance areas and individual houses... whose furniture is, in the opinion of the Medical Officer of Health, unsuitable for admission to a Corporation house.' (23)

At first the intention was to sell to the tenant furniture needed to replace any condemned by the Medical Officer. Eventually a scheme was adopted that led to the council providing the furnishings which would then have the same status as other fixtures and fittings. A small special committee of councillors would examine each case individually, and the value of the furnishings supplied would not exceed that of the condemned items. Thus, in the worst instance, a family could be told:

• Their home was insanitary and must be demolished. A tiny and distant house would be supplied in substitution.

• If they could not afford the new rent, they may apply for a means-tested rent rebate.

• Their furniture was to be inspected but if too vermin-ridden to be moved to the new house, it would be burned, and a group of strangers would decide what must be replaced. This would then be obtained on the basis of the lowest tender.

Not all of the displaced found their way to Brothers Street. Some sought their own alternative private accommodation when demolition took place (their furniture still being disinfected). If a tenant, having moved into Council accommodation, subsequently decided to move elsewhere, they could apply to take the new furniture with them, but the house had first to be 'approved', and the furniture would remain council property. In another case, when the £18 limit was insufficient, the tenant had to defray the additional cost.

Thirteen cases were reviewed by the special committee in June 1935 - there were several other meetings. The furniture, obtained from Jepson's, included extending tables, sideboards, a tallboy, chests, small chairs, armchairs, beds, spring mattresses and covers and flock bed sets. Blackburn Co-op supplied sheets, blankets and pillowcases. The houses themselves had been built with fitted stoves and wash-boilers. (24)

The housing built in Beaumaris Avenue/ Green Lane, and later at Higher Hill, was inadequate to cope with the numbers displaced by slum clearance. The Committee decided to 'utilise the large-type houses which are at the time vacant on the various corporation housing estates for rehousing persons displaced from houses included in clearance areas and from individual (insanitary) houses.' (25)

In 1939 another decision 'to reserve twenty houses at Brownhill and Green Lane for rehousing tenants from the fourteen clearance areas now awaiting confirmation' led to protests, and a petition from Green Lane residents. (26)

In 1936 the Corporation negotiated a scheme with the Blackburn Property Owners Association, whereby the Borough would become the tenants of suitable vacant houses and then re-let them to the displaced. (27)

For example, 18 St, Albans Place was rented at 12/- per week plus rates and let again at 17/- including rates etc; the council to find the difference. When a tenant moved home to comply with the overcrowding regulations, the Council paid his removal expenses. The majority of Brothers Street estate residents would have consisted of families relocated from clearance areas. Directory data reveals a notable proportion of labourers and of weavers as well as several female heads. A collier and two bricklayers are typical of trades listed. In terms of social composition, rent paid, house size and attitude to their semi-rural location, there would have been significant differences between these two neighbouring communities.

Map of Green Lane Estate 1931

Appendix

Benefits available to Blackburn's first municipal tenants

When performing a ceremony to mark the completion of the Borough's first block of council houses in Green Lane, Housing Committe Chairman Alderman J. Fielding listed a number of benefits associated with the houses. A local newspaper reported these advantages to be as follows:

1. A separate bathroom with a hot water cylinder which also heats a linen cupboard.

2. The W.C. was in the main building and so was approachable under cover.

3. Rear lobbies to protect the outside scullery doors, adding to comfort.

4. Coal-house and pantry accessible from lobbies - not from outside the house.

5. Stairs lit by a window.

6. Living room as large as the government regulations allowed, with windows designed to catch the maximum amount of sunlight.

7. At least three bedrooms and sometimes four, as 'there were hundreds of two-bedroomed cottages in existence'.

8. Three quarters of the houses also had a separate parlour.

9. The sculleries were work-rooms, their use as living rooms being discouraged. They were equipped with gas oven and boiler, sink and drainage board and ample shelving.

10. Space was available in every house for a perambulator.

11. Each living room had built-in dresser with glass doors, with fitted cupboards in the bedrooms.

12. Hot water was available at the scullery sink, bath and washbasin.

13. Bedrooms were, when possible, on the sunny side of the house. At least two had fireplaces, with adequate ventilation in the others.

References

1. Blackburn Times, 13th November 1920. The paper was reporting the formal opening of the Green Lane development.

2. Cited by Beattie, p 157 in the Borough's bid for city status in 1934.

3. 1921 census reports - Lancashire, table 3. The figures divide the total area of the ward into the number of dwellings; and so includes streets, industrial buildings, open spaces etc.

4. Report of the Special Sub-committee on Housing, Minutes. Blackburn Borough Council, 27th November 1918.

5. Report of the special sub-committee, 23rd July 1919.

6. Dr. Addison's letter reproduced in the Blackburn Times, 15th November 1919.

7. Blackburn Times, 24th April 1920.

8. Report of the Housing Sub-committee, 16th July 1919.

9. Blackburn Times, 13th November 1920.

10. Blackburn Times, 4th December 1920.

11. Blackburn Times, 31st July 1920.

12. Blackburn Times, 12th June 1920.

13. Report of the Housing Sub-committee, 23rd August 1922.

14. Minutes, General Purposes and Paid Officers Committee, 24th September 1923.

15. Barrett's Directory of Blackburn, 1925 and 1935.

16. Blackburn Times, 1st June 1922.

17. Minutes, Estate and Housing Committee 21st August 1939. The Committee resolved to take no action until the Medical Officer has ascertained the position by conducting a census of the properties in question.

18. Report, Housing Sub-committee 12th June 1931. The same meeting approved the purchase of the 7½ acre site at Green Lane.

19. Report of the Health Sub-committee, 4th July 1933. The seven clearance areas were Brunswick Street (5 dwellings), Crook Street (3), Meadow Lane (6), Nab Lane (10), Daisy Lane (4) and Denville Street (3).

20. Minutes, Estates and Housing Committee, 19th June 1933.

21. Analysis based upon the locations listed in the Health Committee minutes for 20th November, and Barrett's Directory for 1930. The directories do not record Back Meadow Lane or Spring Lane.

22. Minutes, Estates and Housing Committee, 14th May 1934.

23. Minutes, Estates and Housing Committee, 12th April, 20th May and 17th June 1935.

24. Reports of Special Sub-committee on Furnishings, 20th June 1935.

25. Minutes, Estates and Housing Committee, 18th December 1936.

26. Minutes, Estates and Housing Committee, 19th June 1935.

27. Report of Health Sub-committee, 7th July, and minutes of Estates and Housing Committee, 16th November 1936.

Image of Houses

Green Lane, O S map 1:2500 (1931)

Sources

Primary:

Barrett's Directory of Blackburn: 1919, 1925, 1930, 1935 and 1939

Blackburn Borough Council: Electoral Rolls, 1920 to 1936

Blackburn Borough Council: Minute Books, 1918 to 1939

Blackburn Times: Various

HM Government: Blackburn Improvement Act, 1882

Blackburn Library: Local Studies photograph collection

Office of Census and Population: Census reports, Lancashire, 1911, 1921, 1931

Ordinance Survey: 1:2500 scale plans of Blackburn, 1930/31, 1937 and 1956

Secondary:

Beattie, Derek Blackburn: Development of a Cotton Town. Halifax Ryburn, 1992

Burnett, John - A Social History of Housing, 1815-1970. London. Methuen, 1980

Clarke, J.J - A History of Local Government of the United Kingdom. London. Herbert Jenkins, 1955

Morgan, N - Deadly Dwellings. Preston, Mullion Books 1993

Power, Anne - Hovels to High Rise: State Housing in Europe since 1850. London, Routledge 1993

Swinson, Arthur - The History of Public Health. Exeter, Wheaton Books 1965.

Image of street on housing estate

Blackburn Local History Society Journal 2000-2001. Page 17.

Transcribed by Shazia Kasim

Published March 2025

Housing in Blackburn between the Wars